62% of 2007 Bankruptcies Include Medical Debt

ExpandCollapse

New Member

A study released by the American Journal of Medicine shows 62% of the 2007 bankruptcy cases included relief from medical debt. Here is the interesting part of the study, "Most medical debtors were well educated and middle class; three quarters had health insurance."

Here is the discussion here, of the people with medical insurance, how many have converge that will leave them vulnerable to financial catastrophe at a time when they should be focused on getting better? Could this be why over 70% American's agree we need health care reform?

ExpandCollapse

Banned

My Old Man (RIP) worked for the pre-destruction AT&T (Bell Labs) and retired with 100% medical benefits. In the last 3 years of his life, his medical expenses were probably more than his total earnings during 26 years at Bell Labs.

ExpandCollapse

New Member

Health care reform does not have to include marxist government run health care. We need to be addressing the actual problems. The government control doesn't cut it.

Click to expand...

Just curious, how do you propose we get cost/coverage under control? As this article states, there are people with insurance having to go bankrupt because of medical bills.

We have United Health Care through my wifes job. It is an 80/20 split up to the out of pocket maximum. My daughter had to get rods put in her back because of curvature in her spine and we endured many bills beyond the out of pocket max and the insurance company always had an excuse. We also were billed directly by doctors for things the insurance wouldn't cover. I guess those things weren't necessary for the procedure.

They also force you to get generic drugs if available even if your doctor says the generic is not an adequate substitute.

I am not 100% in favor of the public option but I really don't see another way to get cost and coverage under control. What would you suggest? I am open to reform without the public option but I don't see that the insurers left us many options. I will say the tax credits and suggestions along those lines don't make sense since they will do nothing about cost.

However, I do see them making a lot more concessions now that the public option is possible. I guess we'll see how this one turns out.

ExpandCollapse

New Member

wonder how many more bankruptcies there will be when obama has to raise taxes to pay for all he wants done?
I wonder how many of those bankrupices also include housing loans people couldn't afford in the first place, that the banks handed out after clintontn old them too.

Part of the problem IS private medical "insurance." People who pay cash can get a BIG discount off the posted price.

Click to expand...

really, wheres that happening at? not here thats for sure.
as we can see in other countries with national health care, health care goes down hill, people don't get treatment, some don't get to see doctors, and if they do it's weeks later. and obamas people have said they would need to cut out some medications adn surgeries, other treatments in order to keep costs down so the governement could pay for it all.

ExpandCollapse

Active Member

Part of the problem IS private medical "insurance." People who pay cash can get a BIG discount off the posted price.

Click to expand...

That is just not true. Hospitals and clinics around here charge anyone without insurance full price and expect to be paid in full as soon as the patient gets the bill. Even though it is supposed to be against the law, some places charge the uninsured more than the insured.

ExpandCollapse

Well-Known Member

Just curious, how do you propose we get cost/coverage under control? As this article states, there are people with insurance having to go bankrupt because of medical bills.

We have United Health Care through my wifes job. It is an 80/20 split up to the out of pocket maximum. My daughter had to get rods put in her back because of curvature in her spine and we endured many bills beyond the out of pocket max and the insurance company always had an excuse. We also were billed directly by doctors for things the insurance wouldn't cover. I guess those things weren't necessary for the procedure.

They also force you to get generic drugs if available even if your doctor says the generic is not an adequate substitute.

I am not 100% in favor of the public option but I really don't see another way to get cost and coverage under control. What would you suggest? I am open to reform without the public option but I don't see that the insurers left us many options. I will say the tax credits and suggestions along those lines don't make sense since they will do nothing about cost.

However, I do see them making a lot more concessions now that the public option is possible. I guess we'll see how this one turns out.

Click to expand...

Just because they go bankrupt does not mean it is a result of medical bills. When you file bankruptcy you include all bills. Anyone who files bankruptcy and has medical bills will automatically include them. But this does not prove cause and effect.

The government cannot run SS, Medicare or veterans care without major problems. People are doing without in every system. The government has prove world wide that it is inefficient to run mass amounts of anything. Yet with all the proof available libbies want to turn their head and use it anyway. Insane.

ExpandCollapse

Active Member

The article also said that 77.9% of those medical bankruptcies were due to the loss of income as a result of the illness.

In other words it wasn't medical bills that resulted in bankruptcy - it was a loss of income.

How would changes in the health care system change this?

Click to expand...

Now that's not fair. You've done gone and messed up the OP's agenda.

We don't allow honest evaluation of statistics here. You'll have to do that elsewhere.

billwald said:

Part of the problem IS private medical "insurance." People who pay cash can get a BIG discount off the posted price.

Click to expand...

No, they don't.

There is one thing that all of us insured folks should do: Even though it's work, and even though you're covered, check your bill! I get itemized bills, and contest those charges that shouldn't be there. When my little girl was born, nearly died, and spent 10 days in NICU (cost: around $100K), I ended up contesting, and having removed, over $2,500 worth of charges.

When we don't carefully check things, and we get overcharged...someone eventually must pay for that.

ExpandCollapse

New Member

I wonder how many of those bankrupices also include housing loans people couldn't afford in the first place, that the banks handed out after clintontn old them too.

Click to expand...

I wonder how many couldn't pay their mortgage because they had medical bills.

Clinton's legislation was just one part of the failed loan formula. It was not the total cause. All Clinton did was backed the loans with FHA and made it EASIER for people to get loans. ARMS and balloon loans were created by the bankers to get more people to meet the EASIER criteria. They need to take some of the blame also.

It was not just the easier criteria, it was also some of the things we did to get people to qualify with the easier criteria. Like stated income... Who came up with that? You tell me how much you make... No proof. How about lending 125% to the value of the home? Clinton didn't do that.

ExpandCollapse

New Member

Just because they go bankrupt does not mean it is a result of medical bills. When you file bankruptcy you include all bills. Anyone who files bankruptcy and has medical bills will automatically include them. But this does not prove cause and effect.

Click to expand...

According to the article, it was the medical bills of 77.9% of the people who caused the bankruptcy. I agree that was not their only debt but I take that to mean to were making ends meet until the medical bills got added to the equation. It was those bills that put them over the cliff.

The government cannot run SS, Medicare or veterans care without major problems. People are doing without in every system. The government has prove world wide that it is inefficient to run mass amounts of anything. Yet with all the proof available libbies want to turn their head and use it anyway. Insane.

Click to expand...

Again, you are talking about what the government can't do or the inadequacies of current programs. Everyone see's the problems with the government, no one is given genius status for pointing those out.

What you are not proposing are solutions. We clearly have a problem that we must address before we drown in our own debt. How do you propose we solve it without the public option?

ExpandCollapse

Well-Known Member

According to the article, it was the medical bills of 77.9% of the people who caused the bankruptcy. I agree that was not their only debt but I take that to mean to were making ends meet until the medical bills got added to the equation. It was those bills that put them over the cliff.

Again, you are talking about what the government can't do or the inadequacies of current programs. Everyone see's the problems with the government, no one is given genius status for pointing those out.

What you are not proposing are solutions. We clearly have a problem that we must address before we drown in our own debt. How do you propose we solve it without the public option?

Click to expand...

Stop paying for health care for illegals. It drives up the cost for everyone else. Stop frivolous law suits against doctors by those who are simply looking for a pay day it drives up the costs for every one else.

As far as the genius status it certainly takes not a genius to place the burden on government. And it is a result of the galactically lazy that wants government to do everything for them.

ExpandCollapse

Active Member

Clinton's legislation was just one part of the failed loan formula. It was not the total cause. All Clinton did was backed the loans with FHA and made it EASIER for people to get loans. ARMS and balloon loans were created by the bankers to get more people to meet the EASIER criteria. They need to take some of the blame also.

It was not just the easier criteria, it was also some of the things we did to get people to qualify with the easier criteria. Like stated income... Who came up with that? You tell me how much you make... No proof. How about lending 125% to the value of the home? Clinton didn't do that.

Click to expand...

Of course, the lenders put a gun to the heads of these poor, defenseless borrowers, and forced them to borrow money they couldn't afford to repay...

Yes: God will have plenty to say against those who exploit the poor. But those who engage in stupid lending are not innocent. They made stupid decisions, and stupid decisions have consequences.

ExpandCollapse

New Member

This is a touchy one. I would totally be in favor but I can't see denying medical to one who is dying or especially their kids because they seek a better life. Their real crime is wanting the American dream. Sure, we'd like them to come through the front door but do we toss them on the streets to die because of their citizenship status?

As far as the genius status it certainly takes not a genius to place the burden on government. And it is a result of the galactically lazy that wants government to do everything for them.

Click to expand...

When people are being robbed, I don't think it's unfair to look for a cop. Or even another private citizen to help. In this case we are being robbed by an industry that is holding us captive by necessity and no competition to control cost.

ExpandCollapse

New Member

Of course, the lenders put a gun to the heads of these poor, defenseless borrowers, and forced them to borrow money they couldn't afford to repay...

Click to expand...

You have a strange way of putting blame in single directions. I can say none of these borrowers would have received the loan if the bankers didn't creatively find ways to make them qualify. My point is that is was not Clinton's legislation (with a Republican congress by the way) that was the single cause of the problem. Everyone involved had a part to play and should share in the blame.

Yes: God will have plenty to say against those who exploit the poor. But those who engage in stupid lending are not innocent. They made stupid decisions, and stupid decisions have consequences.

Click to expand...

Many of them took the loans with every intention and ability to paying them back or with the hopes to refinance in three or four years when their credit was better. Through no fault of their own, job loss, illness or disability, death of the money maker, they found themselves not able to fulfill their obligation. I think it's a bit harsh to call them stupid. Some were just unfortunate victims of the economy.

ExpandCollapse

Well-Known Member

This is a touchy one. I would totally be in favor but I can't see denying medical to one who is dying or especially their kids because they seek a better life. Their real crime is wanting the American dream. Sure, we'd like them to come through the front door but do we toss them on the streets to die because of their citizenship status?

Click to expand...

The repsonsibility is theirs not ours. They can go home and get medical care.

how about this, what if we deport them after we give them care?

Click to expand...

How about making it impossible for them to earn a living thus cutting off the motivation for them being here to begin with.

I totally agree with this one but the question is how do we separate frivolous from legitimate?

Click to expand...

To many cases are way to obvious but the complainant gets a settlement anyway.

When people are being robbed, I don't think it's unfair to look for a cop. Or even another private citizen to help. In this case we are being robbed by an industry that is holding us captive by necessity and no competition to control cost.

Quick Navigation

Support us!

The management of Baptist Board works very hard to make sure the community is running the best software, best design, and all the other bells and whistles that goes into a forum our size.Your support is much appreciated!